Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

810 N.E.2d 726

Bobrow v. Bobrow

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided June 16, 2004

This page is marked noindex.

Indiana Court of Appeals · decided 2004-06-16

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently April 2015

4 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2004-06-16

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

MATHIAS, Judge

¶1concurring.

¶2I am pleased to fully concur in Judge Vaidik's well-reasoned opinion.

¶3I write only to express my concern that every day, there is much "confidential financial information" contained within doe-uments routinely filed and submitted in evidence in judicial proceedings (dissolution and otherwise) throughout Indiana, without any claim of privacy under IC 5-14-3. Until now, attorneys and their clients have correctly assumed that civil society would accord them the privacy customarily due such proceedings. It troubles me to add yet another pleading, a motion to seal, to the time and expense of obtaining a very common legal resolution, a dissolution of one's marriage, in Indiana. I am most displeased with this result and its effect upon parties, their attorneys, and courts, but I see no alternative.

/810/ne2d/726 · .json · Public domain